I've seen similar slowdowns in 2.0 - roughly the same 15%.
For instance, http://i.imgur.com/Qi6oo62.png
That's a comparison of 1.2.6 to 2.0beta1. Ignore the lines that say
speculative_retry=95percentile and ALWAYS.
Default 1.2 beats Default 2.0 in overall operation time.
Bisecting the cause of t
We haven't seen that in our tests. Suggest bisecting to figure out
what changed it for your workload.
On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 2:47 AM, Radim Kolar wrote:
> thrift, sync
--
Jonathan Ellis
Project Chair, Apache Cassandra
co-founder, http://www.datastax.com
@spyced
Should probably use this instead. All benchmarks show it¹s faster than
anything that has ever been written before.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-5582
On 8/12/13, 12:47 AM, "Radim Kolar" wrote:
>thrift, sync
thrift, sync
Thrift? Native?
If Thrift- what threading model?
> On Aug 11, 2013, at 4:13 PM, "Radim Kolar" wrote:
>
> Dne 10.8.2013 21:30, Brandon Williams napsal(a):
>> Make a conf/triggers directory and that will fix it. We fixed this in trunk
>> already.
> yes, that fixed it.
>
> 2.0 is considerably sl
Dne 10.8.2013 21:30, Brandon Williams napsal(a):
Make a conf/triggers directory and that will fix it. We fixed this in trunk
already.
yes, that fixed it.
2.0 is considerably slower then 1.2 for cpu bound tasks, average
throughput is -15% at 50 threads.
2.0 with 20 threads burst thruput with
If you're using ccm this can happen. Make a conf/triggers directory and
that will fix it. We fixed this in trunk already.
On Aug 10, 2013 1:31 PM, "Radim Kolar" wrote:
> did you package it correctly? something seems to be missing
>
> ERROR 20:27:11,578 Internal error processing batch_mutate
> jav
